Dostarlimab for Primary Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dostarlimab is an immune-checkpoint inhibitor that targets the programmed cell death 1 receptor. The combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy may have synergistic effects in the treatment of endometrial cancer. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible patients with primary advanced stage III or IV or first recurrent endometrial cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either dostarlimab (500 mg) or placebo, plus carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve, 5 mg per milliliter per minute) and paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter of body-surface area), every 3 weeks (six cycles), followed by dostarlimab (1000 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks for up to 3 years. The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, and overall survival. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 494 patients who underwent randomization, 118 (23.9%) had mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR), microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors. In the dMMR-MSI-H population, estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46.3 to 73.4) in the dostarlimab group and 15.7% (95% CI, 7.2 to 27.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.50; P<0.001). In the overall population, progression-free survival at 24 months was 36.1% (95% CI, 29.3 to 42.9) in the dostarlimab group and 18.1% (95% CI, 13.0 to 23.9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was 71.3% (95% CI, 64.5 to 77.1) with dostarlimab and 56.0% (95% CI, 48.9 to 62.5) with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87). The most common adverse events that occurred or worsened during treatment were nausea (53.9% of the patients in the dostarlimab group and 45.9% of those in the placebo group), alopecia (53.5% and 50.0%), and fatigue (51.9% and 54.5%). Severe and serious adverse events were more frequent in the dostarlimab group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, with a substantial benefit in the dMMR-MSI-H population. (Funded by GSK; RUBY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03981796.).

Phase II trial of pembrolizumab and epacadostat in recurrent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: An NRG oncology study GY016.

INTRODUCTION: Early reports of PD-1 inhibition in ovarian clear cell carcinomas (OCCC) demonstrate promising response. We evaluated the combination of pembrolizumab and IDO-1 inhibitor epacadostat in patients with recurrent OCCC. METHODS: This single arm, two-stage, phase 2 trial included those with measurable disease and 1-3 prior regimens. Patients received intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks and oral epacadostat 100 mg twice a day. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), secondary endpoints were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The study was powered to detect an absolute 25% increase in response (15% to 40%). RESULTS: Between September 28, 2018 and April 10, 2019, 14 patients enrolled at first stage. Rate of accrual was 2.3 patients per month. Median age was 65 years (44-89), 10 (71.4%) had ≥2 prior regimens. ORR was 21% (95% CI 5-51%) within 7 months of study entry with 3 partial responses, and 4 had stable disease (disease control rate 50%). Median PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI: 1.9-9.6), OS 18.9 months (95% CI: 1.9-NR). Most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were electrolyte abnormalities and gastrointestinal pain, nausea, vomiting, bowel obstruction. In July 2019, the study reached the pre-specified criteria to re-open to second stage; however, the study closed prematurely in February 2021 due to insufficient drug supply. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab and epacadostat demonstrated an ORR of 21% in this small cohort of recurrent OCCC. The rapid rate of accrual highlights the enthusiasm and need for therapeutic studies in patients with OCCC.

Homologous recombination deficiency should be tested for in patients with advanced stage high-grade serous ovarian cancer aged 70 years and over.

OBJECTIVE: Due to limited data on homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in older patients (≥ 70 years) with advanced stage high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC), we aimed to determine the rates of HRD at diagnosis in this age group. METHODS: From the Phase 3 trial VELIA the frequency of HRD and BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) was compared between younger (< 70 years) and older participants. HRD and somatic(s) BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) were determined at diagnosis using Myriad myChoice® CDx and germline(g) BRCA1/2 PVs using Myriad BRACAnalysis CDx®. HRD was defined if a BRCA PV was present, or the genomic instability score (GIS) met threshold (GIS ≥ 33 & ≥ 42 analyzed). RESULTS: Of 1140 participants, 21% were ≥ 70 years. In total, 26% (n = 298) had a BRCA1/2 PV and HRD, 29% (n = 329) were HRD/BRCA wild-type, 33% (n = 372) non-HRD, and 12% HR-status unknown (n = 141). HRD rates were higher in younger participants, 59% (n = 476/802), compared to 40% (n = 78/197) of older participants (GIS ≥ 42) [p < 0.001]; similar rates demonstrated with GIS ≥ 33, 66% vs 48% [p < 0.001]. gBRCA PVs observed in 24% younger vs 8% of older participants (p < 0.001); sBRCA in 8% vs 10% (p = 0.2559), and HRD (GIS ≥ 42) not due to gBRCA was 35% vs 31% (p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: HRD frequency was similar in participants aged < 70 and ≥ 70 years (35% vs 31%) when the contribution of gBRCA was excluded; rates of sBRCA PVs were also similar (8% v 10%), thus underscoring the importance of HRD and BRCA testing at diagnosis in older patients with advanced HGSC given the therapeutic implications.

Gemogenovatucel-T (Vigil): bi-shRNA plasmid-based targeted immunotherapy.

We describe in this review the historical evidence leading up to the concept and design of Vigil and subsequent clinical applications including safety and efficacy in a randomized, controlled Phase IIB trial. Vigil (gemogenovatucel-T) is a unique triple function targeted immunotherapy that demonstrates preclinical and clinical systemic anticancer activity. Construction of Vigil involves harvest of autologous malignant tissue for neoantigen targeting (ideally containing clonal neoantigens) followed by a two-day process involving transfection with a plasmid to provide a permissive 'training environment' for the patient's immune system. Transfected plasmid components contain an expressive human GMCSF DNA segment to enhance anticancer immune functional response and a second component expressing bi-shRNAfurin which reduces TGFß isomers (TGFß1 and TGFß2) thereby reducing cancer inhibition of the targeted immune response. Results generated to date justify advancement to confirmatory clinical trials supporting product regulatory approval.

Vigil is an anticancer treatment that employs three methods of enhancing the body's immune system to identify and kill cancer cells. The construction of Vigil involves cancer cells from the same person being treated (personalized therapy) in combination with added anticancer genetic signals to enhance the number and function anti-anticancer immune cells and to guide the immune cells to the cancer and not to normal organs of the body. In this manner, an army of immune cells are created that can move to attacking the cancer using blood vessels to get to the cancer anywhere it tries to grow in the body. One study (Phase I) performed with this product to determine safety and dose range demonstrated an optimal dose and schedule. Another study (Phase IIA) showed initial clinical benefit. A third more complex study (Phase IIB) in patients treated with Vigil compared with standard of care without Vigil demonstrated the ability to prolong the patients life and time without their cancer getting worse without any significant side effects associated with the treatment in a unique subset of ovarian cancer patients, those with the ability to repair their DNA. Based on the composite of these results, Vigil is an attractive targeted immunotherapy justified for late-stage clinical testing.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine in folate receptor alpha (FRα)-high platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: final overall survival and post hoc sequence of therapy subgroup results from the SORAYA trial.

OBJECTIVE: The single-arm, phase II SORAYA trial (NCT04296890) of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx in folate receptor alpha (FRα)-high platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (n=105 (efficacy-evaluable)) met its primary endpoint with an objective response rate of 32.4% (95% CI, 23.6 to 42.2). Here we report final SORAYA trial results for overall survival and post hoc objective response rates in subgroups by sequence and number of prior therapies. METHODS: Eligible patients had high-grade serous platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with high FRα expression and one to three prior therapies (prior bevacizumab required). Enrolled participants received 6 mg/kg mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx adjusted ideal body weight intravenously once every 3 weeks until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Final overall survival and post hoc objective response rates were assessed in efficacy-evaluable participants. The safety population included all patients who received ≥1 dose of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx. RESULTS: At data cut-off (December 22, 2022; n=105), final median overall survival was 15.0 months (95% CI, 11.5 to 18.7). Median overall survival in participants with one to two prior therapy lines was 18.7 months (95% CI, 13.8 to not estimable (NE)) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 7.1 to 16.7) with three prior therapy lines. Median overall survival was 15.0 months (95% CI, 11.5 to NE) in participants with prior poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) treatment versus 14.0 months (95% CI, 7.1 to NE) in those without. Objective response rate (data cut-off: November 17, 2021) differed among participants who received mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx as their first treatment in the platinum-resistant setting (34.8%; 95% CI, 23.5 to 47.6) versus a different first treatment (28.2%; 95% CI, 15.0 to 44.9) or had received prior bevacizumab in a platinum-sensitive (34.0%; 95% CI, 24.6 to 44.5) versus platinum-resistant setting (17.6%; 95% CI, 3.8 to 43.4). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: These results support the clinically meaningful efficacy of mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx in FRα-expressing platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, irrespective of prior treatment or sequence.

Exploring global barriers to optimal ovarian cancer care: thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the barriers to ovarian cancer care, as reported in the open ended responses of a global expert opinion survey, highlighting areas for improvement in global ovarian cancer care. Potential solutions to overcome these barriers are proposed. METHODS: Data from the expert opinion survey, designed to assess the organization of ovarian cancer care worldwide, were analyzed. The survey was distributed across a global network of physicians. We examined free text, open ended responses concerning the barriers to ovarian cancer care. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to identify, analyze, and report meaningful patterns within the data. RESULTS: A total of 1059 physicians from 115 countries completed the survey, with 438 physicians from 93 countries commenting on the barriers to ovarian cancer care. Thematic analysis gave five major themes, regardless of income category or location: societal factors, inadequate resources in hospital, economic barriers, organization of the specialty, and need for early detection. Suggested solutions include accessible resource stratified guidelines, multidisciplinary teamwork, public education, and development of gynecological oncology training pathways internationally. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides an international perspective on the main barriers to optimal ovarian cancer care. The themes derived from our analysis highlight key target areas to focus efforts to reduce inequalities in global care. Future regional analysis involving local representatives will enable country specific recommendations to improve the quality of care and ultimately to work towards closing the care gap.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx: first antibody/antigen-drug conjugate (ADC) in advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx (MIRV) is a conjugate of a folate receptor alpha (FRα)-directed antibody and the maytansinoid microtubule inhibitor, DM4. Accumulating pre-clinical and clinical data supported the safety and anti-tumor activity of MIRV in tumors expressing FRα. In 2017, a phase I expansion study reported the first experience of MIRV in FRα-positive platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with promising results. However, the phase III FORWARD I study failed to demonstrate a significant benefit of MIRV in FRα-positive tumors. On the basis of the data reported from this latter study, MIRV was then explored in the FRα-high population only and using a different folate receptor assay. The phase II SORAYA trial supported the adoption of MIRV in this setting. Hence, the US Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval of MIRV for patients with FRα-positive platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who have received 1-3 prior systemic treatment regimens. Moreover, the results of the MIRASOL trial showed a significant reduction in the risk of tumor progression or death among patients treated with MIRV versus chemotherapy. VENTANA FOLR1 (FOLR-2.1) was approved as a companion diagnostic test to identify FRα patients. MIRV appears to be a significant asset in managing advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer. Further trials are needed to confirm these promising results, even in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and maintenance settings.

ENGOT-EN20/GOG-3083/XPORT-EC-042 - A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial of selinexor in maintenance therapy after systemic therapy for patients with p53 wild-type, advanced, or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: rationale, methods, and trial design.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Biomarkers such as tumor protein 53 (TP53) in endometrial cancer can integrate novel strategies for improved and individualized treatment that could impact patient outcomes. In an exploratory analysis of the phase III ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study of selinexor maintenance monotherapy 80 mg in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer, a pre-specified subgroup of patients with TP53 wild type (wt) endometrial cancer showed preliminary activity at long-term follow-up with a generally manageable safety profile (median progression-free survival 27.4 months vs 5.2 months placebo, HR=0.41). PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of selinexor compared with placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Selinexor administered at 60 mg weekly as maintenance therapy will show manageable safety and maintain efficacy in patients with TP53wt advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer after systemic therapy versus placebo. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of selinexor as a maintenance therapy in patients with advanced or recurrent TP53wt endometrial cancer. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed endometrial cancer, TP53wt confirmed by next-generation sequencing, completed at least 12 weeks of platinum-based therapy with or without immunotherapy, with confirmed partial response or complete response, and primary Stage IV disease or at first relapse. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 in the intent-to-treat population. SAMPLE SIZE: A total of 220 patients will be enrolled. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Accrual is expected to be completed in 2024 with presentation of results in 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05611931.

Trametinib versus standard of care in patients with recurrent low-grade serous ovarian cancer (GOG 281/LOGS): an international, randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum is characterised by MAPK pathway aberrations and its reduced sensitivity to chemotherapy relative to high-grade serous carcinoma. We compared the MEK inhibitor trametinib to physician's choice standard of care in patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma. METHODS: This international, randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2/3 trial was done at 84 hospitals in the USA and UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma and measurable disease, as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1, had received at least one platinum-based regimen, but not all five standard-of-care drugs, and had received an unlimited number of previous regimens. Patients with serous borderline tumours or tumours containing low-grade serous and high-grade serous carcinoma were excluded. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral trametinib 2 mg once daily (trametinib group) or one of five standard-of-care treatment options (standard-of-care group): intravenous paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 by body surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle; intravenous pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 40-50 mg/m2 by body surface area once every 4 weeks; intravenous topotecan 4 mg/m2 by body surface area on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 28-day cycle; oral letrozole 2·5 mg once daily; or oral tamoxifen 20 mg twice daily. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region (USA or UK), number of previous regimens (1, 2, or ≥3), performance status (0 or 1), and planned standard-of-care regimen. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival while receiving randomised therapy, as assessed by imaging at baseline, once every 8 weeks for 15 months, and then once every 3 months thereafter, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02101788, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Feb 27, 2014, and April 10, 2018, 260 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the trametinib group (n=130) or the standard-of-care group (n=130). At the primary analysis, there were 217 progression-free survival events (101 [78%] in the trametinib group and 116 [89%] in the standard-of-care group). Median progression-free survival in the trametinib group was 13·0 months (95% CI 9·9-15·0) compared with 7·2 months (5·6-9·9) in the standard-of-care group (hazard ratio 0·48 [95% CI 0·36-0·64]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the trametinib group were skin rash (17 [13%] of 128), anaemia (16 [13%]), hypertension (15 [12%]), diarrhoea (13 [10%]), nausea (12 [9%]), and fatigue (ten [8%]). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the standard-of-care group were abdominal pain (22 [17%]), nausea (14 [11%]), anaemia (12 [10%]), and vomiting (ten [8%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Trametinib represents a new standard-of-care option for patients with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma. FUNDING: NRG Oncology, Cancer Research UK, Target Ovarian Cancer, and Novartis.

Patient-reported outcomes of maintenance rucaparib in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL3, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To compare NFOSI-18 Disease Related Symptoms - Physical (DRSP), Total score, and side effect bother between maintenance rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) vs. placebo in the phase III ARIEL3 trial. METHODS: ARIEL3 (NCT01968213) included patients with ovarian carcinoma who responded to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy. The NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were secondary endpoints. The NFOSI-18 contains a side effect impact item (GP5): "I am bothered by side effects of treatment." We compared treatment arms on change from baseline of DRS-P and Total scores using mixed models with repeated measures (MRMM). Time to first and confirmed deterioration of NFOSI-18 DRS-P and Total scales were analyzed using Cox regression. We also calculated the proportion of patients reporting moderate to high side effect bother on GP5. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort, mean change from baseline favored the placebo. Compared to placebo, rucaparib was associated with higher risk of deterioration [e.g., 4-point deteriorator definition hazard ratio (HR): 1.85; 95% CI: 1.46, 2.36; median time to first deterioration on DRSP: 1.9 vs. 7.0 months]. Confirmed deterioration results resembled those for first deterioration. Proportions of patients reporting moderate/high side effect bother on GP5 fluctuated around 20% across treatment cycles. Results in BRCA mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts were generally similar to those from the ITT cohort. CONCLUSION: This placebo-controlled study in the maintenance therapy setting provides a unique view of the impact of PARP inhibition on the patient-reported outcomes that are commonly used in ovarian cancer clinical trials. Information regarding the adverse side effect impact of PARP inhibitors should be weighed against their clinical benefit.

Selinexor in combination with weekly paclitaxel in patients with metastatic solid tumors: Results of an open label, single-center, multi-arm phase 1b study with expansion phase in ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound which blocks Exportin-1 (XPO1). Our objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of selinexor and weekly paclitaxel. METHODS: This was an open label, single-center, multi-arm phase 1b study utilizing a "3 + 3" design and a "basket-type" expansion in recurrent solid tumors. Selinexor (60 mg or 80 mg twice weekly orally) and weekly paclitaxel (80 mg IV 2 week on, 1 week off) were one of 13 parallel arms. Efficacy was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: All 35 patients treated were evaluable for toxicity and 31 (88%) were evaluable for response. Patient diagnoses included platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian (n = 28), breast (n = 4), prostate (n = 2), and cervical (n = 1) cancer. Patients had a median of four prior therapies (range 1-10), and 47% had a prior taxane in the recurrent setting. There were no DLTs and 60 mg was chosen as the RP2D due to long-term tolerability. Ninety-seven percent of patients had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and the most common grade ≥ 3 TEAE were neutropenia (46%), anemia (31%), and nausea (21%). Among 24 evaluable patients with ovarian cancer, response rate was 17%, CBR was 58%, and median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI 3.7, not reached (NR)). CONCLUSIONS: Oral selinexor in combination with weekly paclitaxel demonstrated promising clinical activity with manageable toxicity. This combination should be considered for further exploration in a randomized study, especially in ovarian malignancies.

Niraparib and dostarlimab for the treatment of recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: results of a Phase II study (MOONSTONE/GOG-3032).

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treatment regimen of dostarlimab, a programmed death-1 inhibitor, combined with niraparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, in patients with BRCA wild type (BRCAwt) recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) who had previously received bevacizumab treatment. METHODS: This Phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study, conducted in the USA, enrolled patients with recurrent PROC to receive niraparib and dostarlimab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (up to 3 years). A preplanned interim futility analysis was performed after the first 41 patients had undergone ≥1 radiographic evaluation (approximately 9 weeks from the first treatment). RESULTS: The prespecified interim futility criterion was met and the study was therefore terminated. For the 41 patients assessed, the objective response rate (ORR) was 7.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.5-19.9); no patients achieved a complete response, 3 patients (7.3%) achieved a partial response (duration of response; 3.0, 3.8, and 9.2 months, respectively), and 9 patients (22.0%) had stable disease. In total, 39 patients (95.1%) experienced a treatment-related adverse event, but no new safety issues were observed. HRQoL, assessed using FOSI, or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Ovarian Symptom Index scores, worsened over time compared with baseline scores. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated due to the observed ORR at the interim futility analysis. This highlights a need for effective therapies in treating patients with recurrent BRCAwt PROC.

Randomized phase II trial of farletuzumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in low CA-125 platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine if farletuzumab, an antifolate receptor-α monoclonal antibody, improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo when added to standard chemotherapy regimens in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) in first relapse (platinum-free interval: 6-36 months) with low cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) levels. METHODS: Eligibility included CA-125 ≤ 3 x upper limit of normal (ULN, 105 U/mL), high-grade serous, platinum-sensitive recurrent OC, previous treatment with debulking surgery, and first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with 1st recurrence between 6 and 36 months since frontline platinum-based treatment. Patients received investigator's choice of either carboplatin (CARBO)/paclitaxel (PTX) every 3 weeks or CARBO/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) every 4 weeks x6 cycles in combination with either farletuzumab [5 mg/kg weekly] or placebo randomized in a 2:1 ratio. Maintenance treatment with farletuzumab (5 mg/kg weekly) or placebo was given until disease progression or intolerance. RESULTS: 214 patients were randomly assigned to farletuzumab+chemotherapy (142 patients) versus placebo+chemotherapy (72 patients). The primary efficacy endpoint, PFS, was not significantly different between treatment groups (1-sided α = 0.10; p-value = 0.25; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89, 80% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71, 1.11), a median of 11.7 months (95% CI: 10.2, 13.6) versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 9.5, 13.2) for farletuzumab+chemotherapy and placebo+chemotherapy, respectively. No new safety concerns were identified with the combination of farletuzumab+chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adding farletuzumab to standard chemotherapy does not improve PFS in patients with OC who were platinum-sensitive in first relapse with low CA-125 levels. Folate receptor-α expression was not measured in this study. (Clinical Trial Registry NCT02289950).

Sequential Targeted Therapy for Advanced, Metastatic, and Recurrent Cervical Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Patient Journey.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes and cost-effectiveness of targeted therapy sequencing for metastatic and recurrent cervical cancer. METHOD: Models were simulated based on phase II and III trials on bevacizumab (bev) from GOG-240, cemiplimab (cemi) from GOG 3016, pembrolizumab (pembro) from KEYNOTE-826, and tisotumab vedotin (tiso) from GOG 3023. Costs were based on IBM Micromedex RED BOOK™ and company listed costs. RESULTS: For [chemo + bev → chemo], total cost was $125,918.04, with median overall survival (mOS) of 21.8 months, and cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) of $119,835.79. For [chemo + bev → cemi], total cost was $187,562.99 with mOS of 28.5 months and CER of $162,039.16. For [chemo + bev + pembro → chemo], total cost was $319,963.78 with mOS 32.9 months and CER of $249,930.10. For [chemo + bev + pembro → tiso], total cost was $455,204.45, with mOS 36.5 months and CER of $320,072.99. CONCLUSION: The combination of immunotherapies and biologics have significantly increased overall survival, but with associated higher costs, primarily related to drug costs.

ARTISTRY-7: phase III trial of nemvaleukin alfa plus pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Standard single-agent nonplatinum chemotherapy provides only modest benefit in a small proportion of patients with platinum-resistant/-refractory ovarian cancer, with objective response rates of 6-20% and progression-free survival of ≈3-4 months. Nemvaleukin alfa (nemvaleukin, ALKS 4230) is a novel cytokine designed to capture and expand the therapeutic potential of high-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) while mitigating its associated toxicity issues. Nemvaleukin preferentially activates cytotoxic CD8+ T cells and natural killer cells with minimal, non-dose-dependent effects on CD4+ regulatory T cells. The global, randomized, open-label, phase III ARTISTRY-7 trial will compare efficacy and safety of nemvaleukin plus pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Clinical Trial Registration: GOG-3063; ENGOT-OV68; NCT05092360 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

In many patients with ovarian cancer who are treated with platinum-based chemotherapy, the tumor comes back after a few months and fails to respond to repeated treatment. This type of disease is called platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). Researchers are searching for new medicines to help more patients with PROC. One treatment approach that has shown promise in different cancers is called immunotherapy. These medicines work by helping the body's immune system attack cancer cells. One of the immunotherapies being studied is called nemvaleukin. It is designed to trigger specific immune responses that may result in the immune system attacking cancer cells while potentially avoiding other immune responses that can block the attack or cause certain unwanted side effects. Nemvaleukin is being studied in a variety of cancer types. In a worldwide clinical trial called ARTISTRY-7, researchers are investigating how nemvaleukin works in patients with PROC when given with another immunotherapy called pembrolizumab. Patients who participate in this trial will be randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: the combination of nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab, nemvaleukin by itself, pembrolizumab by itself, or a type of chemotherapy selected by the treating physician. The main purpose of ARTISTRY-7 is to understand whether the combination of nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab helps patients with PROC live longer without their cancer getting worse. At the time of this writing, ARTISTRY-7 is open for new patients to join.

Integrating antibody drug conjugates in the management of gynecologic cancers.

The clinical development of antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) in ovarian cancer began in 2008 with farletuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, and vintafolide, an antigen drug conjugate, both targeting alpha folate receptor. Over the years, this novel class of drugs expanded to agents with a more sophisticated design and structure, targeting tissue factor (TF) in cervical cancer or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in endometrial cancer. Despite the impressive number of patients included in clinical trials investigating different ADCs across gynecological cancers, it was only recently that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approvals to the first ADCs in gynecologic cancer. In September 2021, the FDA approved tisotumab vedotin (TV) in recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer with disease progression on or after chemotherapy. This was followed in November 2022, by the approval of mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) for adult patients with folate receptor alpha (FRα) positive, platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, who have received one to three prior systemic treatment regimens. Currently, the field of ADCs is rapidly expanding and more than 20 ADC formulations are in clinical trials for the treatment of ovarian, cervical and endometrial tumors. This review summarizes key evidence supporting their use and therapeutic indications, including results from late-stage development trials investigating MIRV in ovarian cancer and TV in cervical cancer. We also outline new concepts in the field of ADCs, including promising targets such as NaPi2 and novel drug delivery platforms such as dolaflexin with a scaffold-linker. Finally, we briefly present challenges in the clinical management of ADC toxicities and the emerging role of ADC combination therapies, including chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic and immunotherapeutic agents.

Biomarker-driven therapy in endometrial cancer.

This article reviews treatments and targets of interest in endometrial cancer by molecular subtype. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) classifies four molecular subtypes-mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H); copy number high (CNH)/p53abn; copy number low (CNL)/no specific molecular profile (NSMP); and POLEmut-which are validated and highly prognostic. Treatment consideration by subtype is now recommended. In March and April 2022, respectively, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) fully approved and the European Medicines Agency adopted a positive opinion recommending the anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab for advanced/recurrent dMMR/MSI-H endometrial cancer which has progressed on or following a platinum-containing therapy. A second anti-PD-1, dostarlimab, received accelerated approval by the FDA and conditional marketing authorization by the European Medicines Agency in this group. The combination of pembrolizumab/lenvatinib for mismatch repair proficient/microsatellite stable endometrial cancer, including p53abn/CNH and NSMP/CNL, received accelerated FDA approval in conjunction with Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration and Health Canada in September 2019. The FDA and European Medicines Agency made full recommendations in July 2021 and October 2021. Trastuzumab is National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) compendium listed for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-positive serous endometrial cancer, which is primarily within the p53abn/CNH subtype. In addition to hormonal therapy, maintenance therapy with selinexor (exportin-1 inhibitor) showed potential benefit in p53-wildtype cases in a subset analysis and is being investigated prospectively. Other treatment regimens being evaluated in NSMP/CNL are hormonal combinations with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors and letrozole. Ongoing trials are evaluating immunotherapy in combination with frontline chemotherapy and other targeted agents. Treatment de-escalation is being evaluated in POLEmut cases given its favorable prognosis with or without adjuvant therapy. Molecular subtyping has important prognostic and therapeutic implications, and should guide patient management and clinical trial design in endometrial cancer, which is a molecularly driven disease.

Systemic therapy de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer: a new era on the horizon?

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have sculpted the current landscape of advanced ovarian cancer treatment. With the advent of targeted maintenance therapies, improved survival rates have led to a timely interest in exploring de-intensified strategies with the goal of improving quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes. The emerging concept of systemic treatment de-escalation would represent a new frontier in personalizing therapy in ovarian cancer. PARPi are so effective that properly selected patients treated with these agents might require less chemotherapy to achieve the same oncologic outcomes. The fundamental key is to limit de-escalation to a narrow subpopulation with favorable prognostic factors, such as patients with BRCA-mutated and/or homologous recombination-deficient tumors without macroscopic residual disease after surgery or other high-risk clinical factors. Potential de-escalation strategies include shifting PARPi in the neoadjuvant setting, de-escalating adjuvant chemotherapy after primary debulking surgery, reducing PARPi maintenance therapy duration, starting PARPi directly after interval debulking surgery, omitting maintenance therapy, and continuing PARPi beyond oligoprogression (if combined with locoregional treatment). Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the feasibility and safety of de-escalating approaches in ovarian cancer and the results are eagerly awaited. This review aims to discuss the current trends, drawbacks, and future perspectives regarding systemic treatment de-escalation in advanced ovarian cancer.

Transfusion use and effect on progression-free, overall survival, and quality of life in upfront treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: evaluation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment EORTC-55971 Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The impact of blood transfusion on ovarian cancer survival is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether peri-operative blood transfusion negatively impacted progression-free survival, overall survival, and quality of life in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: We performed an ancillary analysis of the European Organization for Research and Treatment (EORTC) 55971 phase III trial, in which patients were randomized to primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients included in the per-protocol analysis were categorized by receipt of a transfusion. RESULTS: 612 of 632 (97%) of patients had adequate data for analysis. Of those, 323 (53%) received a transfusion. The transfusion cohort was more likely to have had better Word Health Organization (WHO) performance status, serous histology, undergone primary debulking surgery, and received more aggressive surgery, with higher rates of no gross residual disease. Median overall survival was 34.0 vs 35.2 months in the no transfusion and transfusion cohorts (p=0.97). The adjusted HR for death was 1.18 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.48) in favor of the transfusion cohort. Median progression-free survival was 13.6 vs 12.6 months in the no transfusion and transfusion cohorts (p=0.96). The adjusted HR for progression was 1.14 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.43). There were no significant differences in global quality of life, fatigue, dyspnea, or physical functioning between the two cohorts at baseline or at any of the four assessment times. Grade 3 and 4 surgical site infections were more common in the transfusion cohort. CONCLUSION: Transfusion did not negatively impact progression-free survival or overall survival; however, it was associated with increased peri-operative morbidity without improvements in quality of life.

Evaluating open access publication and research impact in gynecologic oncology.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a citation advantage exists for open access (OA) publications in gynecologic oncology. METHOD: A cross-sectional study of research and review articles published in the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer (IJGC) and in Gynecologic Oncology during 1980-2022. Bibliometric measures were compared between OA publications and non-OA publications. The role of authors in low/middle-income countries was assessed. We analyzed article characteristics associated with a high citations per year (CPY) score. RESULTS: Overall, 18 515 articles were included, of which 2398 (13.0%) articles were published OA. The rate of OA has increased since 2007. During 2018-2022, the average proportion of articles published OA was 34.0% (range 28.5%-41.4%). OA articles had higher CPY (median (IQR), 3.0 (1.5-5.3) vs 1.3 (0.6-2.7), p<0.001). There was a strong positive correlation between OA proportion and impact factor; IJGC - r(23)=0.90, p<0.001, Gynecologic Oncology - r(23)=0.89, p<0.001. Articles by authors from low/middle-income countries were less common among OA articles than among non-OA articles (5.5% vs 10.7%, p<0.001). Articles by authors from low/middle-income countries were less common in the high CPY group than for articles without a high CPY score (8.0% vs 10.2%, p=0.003). The following article characteristics were found to be independently associated with a high CPY: publication after 2007, (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=4.9, 95% CI 4.3 to 5.7), research funding reported (aOR=1.6, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.8), and being published OA (aOR=1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7). Articles written by authors in Central/South America or Asia had lower odds of having high CPY (Central/South America, aOR=0.5, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.8; Asia, aOR=0.6, 95% CI 0.5 to 0.7). CONCLUSION: OA articles have a higher CPY, with a strong positive correlation between OA proportion and impact factor. OA publishing has increased since 2007, but articles written by authors in low/middle-income countries are under-represented among OA publications.